保险学术前沿2023年第1期：《Journal of Risk and Uncertainty》

保险学术前沿是13精最新推出的一个栏目，在这里我们将国内外的保险、精算等权威期刊发表的前沿学术论文呈现给大家，为大家提供一个接触保险最新研究成果的窗口。

今天我们为大家推出的第一期的内容来自《Journal of Risk and Uncertainty》。

《Journal of Risk and Uncertainty》为双月刊，每年6期，每期发表文章4篇左右。2022-2023年影响影子为4.7，JCR分区为Q1，是风险与保险领域的顶级权威学术期刊。

该期刊以研究不确定性下的风险承担行为和决策分析的理论或实证文章为特色，涵盖的主题包括：决策理论和不确定性经济学、不确定性下的选择心理模型、风险和公共政策、不确定性下的行为实证分析，以及对现实世界风险承担行为的实证研究。每篇文章的开始都会通俗易懂地介绍其研究内容的本质、研究发现的解释和含义，以方便不同领域的读者学习参考。

2023年66卷第1期目录及摘要内容

本期目录

●Towards a typology of risk preference: Four risk profiles describe two-thirds of individuals in a large sample of the U.S. population

● Safe options and gender differences in risk attitudes

● Effect of a brief intervention on respondents’ subjective perception of time and discount rates

●Individual characteristics associated with risk and time preferences: A multi country representative survey

Towards a typology of risk preference: Four risk profiles describe two-thirds of individuals in a large sample of the U.S. population

风险偏好的类型化：四种风险画像刻画美国人口大样本中三分之二的个体

作者

Renato Frey（苏黎世大学，普林斯顿大学），Shannon M. Duncan（哥伦比亚大学，宾夕法尼亚大学），Elke U. Weber（普林斯顿大学）

摘要：It has been a longstanding goal of the behavioral sciences to measure and model people’s risk preferences. In this article, we adopt a novel theoretical perspective of doing so and test to what extent specific types of individuals share similar risk profiles (i.e., configurations of multidimensional risk preferences). To this end, we analyzed data of a U.S. sample (N = 3,123) in a comprehensive and rigorous way, resulting in a twofold contribution. First, based on data from the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking scale (DOSPERT) and using a cross-validation procedure, we established a multidimensional trait space including general and domain-specific dimensions of risk preference. Second, we employed model-based cluster analyses in this multidimensional trait space, finding that 66% of participants can be described well with four basic risk profiles. In sum, the typological perspective proposed in this article has important implications for current theories of risk preference and the measurement of individual differences therein.

对人的风险偏好进行度量并建模一直是行为科学的长期目标。在这篇文章中，我们采用了一种新的理论视角，测试了特定类型的个人在多大程度上有相似的风险画像（即多维风险偏好的结构）。为此，我们全面且严格地分析了一个美国的样本数据（N=3123），取得了两个方面的贡献。首先，基于领域特异性风险量表（DOSPERT）的数据，通过交叉验证，我们建立了一个包括一般维度和领域特异性维度的风险偏好多维特征空间。其次，在这个多维特征空间中使用基于模型的聚类分析，我们发现66%的参与者可以被四种基本的风险画像很好地刻画。总之，本文提出的类型化视角对当前风险偏好及其个人差异度量的相关理论具有重要意义。

原文链接：https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11166-022-09398-5

Safe options and gender differences in risk attitudes

无风险选项与风险态度的性别差异

作者

Paolo Crosetto（格勒诺布尔阿尔卑斯大学）， Antonio Filippin （米兰大学，德国劳动研究所）

摘要：Gender differences in risk attitudes have recently been shown to be context-dependent rather than ubiquitous. We manipulate three widely used risk elicitation tasks to test whether the presence of a safe option among the set of alternatives can explain the heterogeneity of the findings. We find that the availability of a safe option induces significant effects in two out of three tasks. Despite the well-known instability of elicited risk preferences, we show with a structural model that the effect on risk attitudes is rather stable across tasks, but not sufficiently strong to reach traditional significance levels.

最近，风险态度的性别差异已被证明是情境依赖的，而不是普遍存在的。我们采用三个广泛使用的风险诱导实验，测试可选项中无风险选项的存在是否可以解释研究结果的异质性。我们发现，无风险选项的存在对三个实验中的两个有显著的影响。尽管，众所周知，经诱导产生的风险偏好具有不稳定性，但我们通过一个结构模型验证了无风险选项对风险态度的影响在所有实验中是相当稳定的，但不足以达到传统的显著性水平。

原文链接：https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11166-022-09400-0

Effect of a brief intervention on respondents’ subjective perception of time and discount rates

简短干预对受访者时间和贴现率主观感知的影响

作者

W. David Bradford（乔治亚大学）， Meriem Hodge Doucette（加利福尼亚州立大学）

摘要：Time discounting is a fundamental characteristic of human decision-making. In general, the literature finds that individuals with lower discount rates are more likely to exhibit healthy behaviors such as saving for the future, exercising, acquiring more education and making other decisions that have long-term benefits. Recent evidence suggests there may be at least two pathways by which individual’s underlying behavioral discount rate may be realized: non-linearities in the intertemporal utility function (standard discounting behavior) and non-linearities in the perception of time. We conducted an experiment on Amazon Mechanical Turk (N = 1000) to evaluate whether discount rates could be modified through an educational intervention. In the experiment, the treatment group had to calculate rates of return for a six-month period for a series of investment vehicles with varying rates of returns including a savings account, a bank certificate of deposit, government bond, mutual fund, and mutual sector fund. The results indicate that even one week after treatment, the intervention group’s discount rates were significantly lower than the control group’s discount rates. This has important implications for the possibility of designing interventions to lower individual discount rates.

时间贴现是人们进行决策的一个基本特征。一般来说，研究发现贴现率较低的人更有可能表现出健康的行为，如为未来储蓄、锻炼、接受更多教育以及做出其他有长期利益的决定。目前证据表明，可能至少有两种途径可以刻画个人潜在的行为贴现率：跨期效用函数的非线性（标准贴现行为）和时间感知的非线性。我们在亚马逊土耳其机器人（Amazon Mechanical Turk）上进行了一项实验（N=1000），以评估是否可以通过教育干预来修改人的贴现率。在实验中，实验组需要计算一系列不同收益投资工具的六个月回报率，包括储蓄账户、银行存单、政府债券、共同基金和产业互助基金。结果表明，即使在干预一周后，干预组的贴现率也显著低于对照组的贴现利率。这对设计干预措施以降低个人贴现率的可能性具有重要意义。

原文链接：https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11166-022-09390-z

Individual characteristics associated with risk and time preferences: A multi country representative survey

与风险和时间偏好相关的个体特征：一项具有多国代表性的调查

作者

Thomas Meissner（马斯特里赫特大学），Xavier Gassmann（勃艮第-弗朗什孔泰大学），Corinne Faure（格勒诺布尔高等商学院），Joachim Schleich（格勒诺布尔高等商学院）

摘要：This paper empirically analyzes how individual characteristics are associated with risk aversion, loss aversion, time discounting, and present bias. To this end, we conduct a large-scale demographically representative survey across eight European countries. We elicit preferences using incentivized multiple price lists and jointly estimate preference parameters to account for their structural dependencies. Our findings suggest that preferences are linked to a variety of individual characteristics such as age, gender, and income as well as some personal values. We also report evidence on the relationship between cognitive ability and preferences. Incentivization, stake size, and the order of presentation of binary choices matter, underlining the importance of controlling for these factors when eliciting economic preferences.

本文采用实证的方法分析了个体特征如何与风险厌恶、损失厌恶、时间折现和当前偏差相关联。为此，我们在欧洲八个国家进行了一项具有人口统计学代表性的大规模调查。我们通过具有激励性的多种价格清单来诱导风险偏好，并同时估计偏好参数以考虑其结构相依性。我们的研究结果表明，风险偏好与个人的各种特征有关，如年龄、性别、收入以及一些个人价值观。我们也指出了认知能力和偏好关联的证据。激励、股权规模和二元选择的呈现顺序很重要，这也强调了在诱导经济偏好时控制这些因素的重要性。

原文链接：https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11166-022-09383-y#auth-Thomas-Meissner-Aff1

2023年66卷第2期目录及摘要内容

本期目录

● The locus of dread for mass shooting risks: Distinguishing alarmist risk beliefs from risk preferences

● Seen and not seen: How people judge ambiguous behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic

● Pay every subject or pay only some?

● On the role of monetary incentives in risk preference elicitation experiments

The locus of dread for mass shooting risks: Distinguishing alarmist risk beliefs from risk preferences

大规模枪击风险的恐惧源：在风险偏好中识别杞人忧天者的风险信念

作者

Rachel E. Dalafave (范德堡大学法学院) W. Kip Viscusi (范德堡大学法学院)

摘要：Data from three surveys before and after the 2022 mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde provide a natural experiment to assess perceptions and valuations of mass shootings. The degree of overestimation of mass shooting risks surged following these tragedies. The odds of believing that mass shooting risks exceeded other firearm homicide risks more than doubled after these shootings. More than one-third of respondents viewed mass shootings as a greater threat to themselves than other firearm homicide risks, and a similar number viewed them as a greater threat to the public. A risk–risk choice experiment examined the tradeoff rate between deaths from mass shootings and from other firearm homicides. People generally viewed prevention of deaths from mass shootings as being equivalent to preventing other firearm homicides. However, respondents who believed that mass shooting risks were a greater threat both to themselves and to the public than other firearm homicide risks treated mass shooting deaths prevented as if they were 37.5% greater than the stated amounts. Risk–risk tradeoff studies and stated preference studies more generally should account for whether respondents’ perceived risk levels differ from the risk values stated in the survey. The principal manifestation of dread for mass shootings is through risk beliefs. Irrational fears may intrude on elicitation of risk preferences, making it essential to account for perceptional biases in stated preference studies of risks.

基于2022年发生在布法罗和乌瓦尔德大规模枪击案前后的三项调查数据为评估对大规模枪击案的看法和评价提供了一个自然实验。这些悲剧发生后，对大规模枪击风险的高估程度激增。在这些枪击事件发生后，认为大规模枪击风险大于其他枪支杀人风险的几率增加了一倍多。超过三分之一的受访者认为，与其他枪支杀人风险相比，大规模枪击事件对自己的威胁更大，相当数量的人认为这对公众的威胁也更大。一项风险-风险选择实验考察了人们对大规模枪击案和其他枪支杀人案导致的死亡人数之间的权衡。人们普遍认为，预防大规模枪击与预防其他枪支杀人减少死亡的效果是一样的。然而，对于那些认为大规模枪击风险对自己和公众的威胁比其他枪支杀人风险更大的受访者来说，预防大规模枪击减少的死亡人数比公布人数高37.5%。风险-风险权衡研究和既定偏好研究通常更应考虑受访者已感知到的风险水平是否与调查中陈述的风险水平不同。对大规模枪击事件的恐惧主要表现在风险信念上。非理性恐惧可能会干扰风险偏好诱导，因此考虑感知偏差在风险的既定偏好研究中至关重要。

原文链接：https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11166-023-09403-5

Seen and not seen: How people judge ambiguous behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic

被察觉与不被察觉：人们如何评判新冠肺炎大流行期间的模糊行为

作者

Andras Molnar(芝加哥大学) , Alex Moore(芝加哥大学), Carman Fowler(杜克大学), George Wu(芝加哥大学)

摘要：How do we judge others’ behavior when they are both seen and not seen—when we observe their behavior but not the underlying traits or history that moderate the perceived riskiness of their behavior? We investigate this question in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: How people make sense of, and judge, vaccination-contingent behaviors—behaviors, such as going to the gym or a bar, which are considered to be more or less risky and appropriate, depending on the target’s vaccination status. While decision theoretic models suggest that these judgments should depend on the probability that the target is vaccinated (e.g., the positivity of judgments should increase linearly with the probability of vaccination), in a large-scale pre-registered experiment (N = 936) we find that both riskiness and appropriateness judgments deviate substantially from such normative benchmarks. Specifically, when participants judge a stranger’s behavior, without being asked to think about the stranger’s vaccination status, they tend to judge these behaviors similarly positively to behaviors of others who are known to be fully vaccinated. By contrast, when participants are explicitly prompted to think about the vaccination status of others, they do so, leading them to view others more disparagingly, at times even more negatively than what a normative benchmark would imply. More broadly, these results suggest new directions for research on how people respond to risk and ambiguity. We demonstrate that even subtle cues can fundamentally alter what information is “top of mind,” that is, what information is included or excluded when making judgments.

我们如何判断他人既可被察觉的又未曾被察觉的行为 (即我们能观察他人的行为本身，而非调节其行为风险的潜在特征或历史经验)？我们在新冠肺炎大流行的背景下研究了此问题：人们如何理解和评判依赖于疫苗接种状态的行为，如去健身房或酒吧，这些行为可能会被认为是风险更大或更小的或适当的，这取决于目标对象的疫苗接种状态。虽然决策理论模型表明，这些判断应该取决于目标对象接种疫苗的概率（例如，正面评判应该随着接种疫苗概率的增长而线性增加）。但在一个大规模的预实验（N=936）中，我们发现风险和适当性评判都与这些理论的规范性基准有很大的偏差。具体来说，当参与者在没有被要求考虑陌生人的疫苗接种状态的情况下去评判陌生人的行为时，他们对这些行为的评判倾向于与已知已完全接种疫苗的其他人的行为保持一致。相反的是，当参与者被明确提示考虑他人的疫苗接种状况时，就会导致他们更加贬抑地看待他人，有时甚至比规范性基准的更负面。更广泛地说，这些结果为研究人们对风险和模糊性的反应提供了新的方向。我们证实了即使是细微的暗示也可以从根本上改变什么信息是“第一重要”，也就是说，在做评判时，哪些信息被包括在内或排除在外。

原文链接：https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11166-022-09396-7

Pay every subject or pay only some?

支付所有人还是只支付部分？

作者

Lisa R. Anderson(威廉与玛丽学院), Beth A. Freeborn(联邦贸易委员会), Patrick McAlvanah(联邦贸易委员会), Andrew Turscak(威廉与玛丽学院)

摘要：Measuring risk tolerance is of interest to policymakers given its importance in decision-making, and previous research has shown that the scale of payoffs influences elicited risk aversion levels. Sometimes budget-conscious researchers pay only some subjects for their decisions when eliciting risk preferences, or pay smaller stakes to everyone. We test the effect of paying some versus paying all subjects in the context of risk preferences, controlling for the difference in stakes induced by paying only some subjects. Paying some subjects yields lower levels of risk aversion than paying everyone, but more risk aversion than paying all subjects lower stakes. Paying some subjects also impacts the ordering of subjects by elicited risk aversion. We estimate a simple structural model of latent risk aversion that derives a correction factor to approximate paying high stakes to all subjects. Paying some subjects high stakes meaningfully impacts the elicited level of risk aversion, but better approximates the condition of paying all subjects high stakes compared to paying everyone lower stakes.

鉴于风险承受能力在决策中的重要性，对它进行度量对决策者很有意义。先前研究表明，支付水平会影响诱导的风险厌恶水平。有时预算紧张的研究人员在进行风险偏好诱导实验时，只为部分受试者的决定支付，或者为每位受试者支付更低的赌注。我们在风险偏好诱导的背景下，通过控制仅支付部分受试者所引起的赌注差异，测试了支付部分与支付所有参与者的效果。支付部分受试者显现出的风险厌恶水平低于支付所有受试者，但高于以更低的赌注支付所有受试者。通过诱导风险厌恶，支付部分受试者也会影响受试者的风险排序。我们估计了一个潜在风险厌恶的简单结构模型，该模型导出了一个修正因子，以近似对所有受试者支付高赌注的情况。向部分受试者支付高赌注有意地影响诱导的风险厌恶水平，但与向所有受试者支付低赌注相比，更接近向所有受试者支付高赌注的情况。

原文链接：https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11166-022-09389-6

On the role of monetary incentives in risk preference elicitation experiments

货币激励在风险偏好诱导实验中的作用

作者

Andreas Hackethal(法兰克福大学), Michael Kirchler(因斯布鲁克大学), Christine Laudenbach(波恩大学), Michael Razen(因斯布鲁克大学), Annika Weber(法兰克福大学)

摘要：Incentivized experiments in which individuals receive monetary rewards according to the outcomes of their decisions are regarded as the gold standard for preference elicitation in experimental economics. These task-related real payments are considered necessary to reveal subjects’ “true preferences.” Using a systematic, large-sample approach with three subject pools of private investors, professional investors, and students, we test the effect of task-related monetary incentives on risk preferences in four standard experimental tasks. We find no significant differences in behavior between and within subjects in the incentivized and non-incentivized regimes. We discuss implications for academic research and forions in the field.

在实验经济学中，个人根据决策结果获得金钱奖励的激励性实验被视为诱导偏好的黄金标准。这些与任务相关的实际支付被认为是揭示受试者“真实偏好”所必需的。我们使用一种系统的、大样本的方法，对私人投资者、专业投资者和学生三个受试者群体进行了测试，我们在四个标准实验中测试了任务相关的货币激励对风险偏好的影响。我们发现，在激励和非激励机制下，受试者群体之间和受试者群体内部的行为没有显著差异。我们讨论了此发现对该领域学术研究的启示。

原文链接：https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11166-022-09377-w